From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68E8C433DF for ; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 19:37:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1132464E for ; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 19:37:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="eH7a5r35" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728646AbgFTTgh (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:37 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:30386 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728544AbgFTTgg (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1592681795; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g8WdW3pAZTXSYPszUGjpxZHpJb0PKXk+NRFlf8yIkz0=; b=eH7a5r35IyZEzKOHPYu2nsMSOv5b5uZUBYsUvKkiqrREQkkjLiOrRjhfYDjeFt3O2+KuGQ LeSIch2tlNnNsVvt0naBbFFuaEHajt9UD+foCFt6gF8BsrI9yTur4EKyuOUF2yy5PVMNwP UD8eadrKXzu3S75FmBtW9khO29+foTg= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-142-a7fo6He5Pi2qzdEZTmsM4Q-1; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: a7fo6He5Pi2qzdEZTmsM4Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74037835B40; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 19:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com (file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.5.7]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A32A05BAD5; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 19:36:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 05KJaNfQ025067; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (mpatocka@localhost) by file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id 05KJaMP8025063; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:22 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com: mpatocka owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:36:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikulas Patocka X-X-Sender: mpatocka@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com To: Herbert Xu cc: Ignat Korchagin , "David S. Miller" , Mike Snitzer , agk@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, dm-crypt@saout.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] dm-crypt excessive overhead In-Reply-To: <20200620012332.GA25340@gondor.apana.org.au> Message-ID: References: <20200619164132.1648-1-ignat@cloudflare.com> <20200619165548.GA24779@redhat.com> <20200620012332.GA25340@gondor.apana.org.au> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 20 Jun 2020, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:39:39PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > > I'm looking at this and I'd like to know why does the crypto API fail in > > hard-irq context and why does it work in tasklet context. What's the exact > > reason behind this? > > You're not supposed to do any real work in IRQ handlers. All > the substantial work should be postponed to softirq context. I see. BTW - should it also warn if it is running in a process context with interrupts disabled? Mikulas > Why do you need to do work in hard IRQ context? > > Cheers, > -- > Email: Herbert Xu > Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ > PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt >